📌 Challenging broad spectrum patents!

The European Patent Office at Munich recently ran into opposition to a broad spectrum patent granted on all GM soyabean varieties to a Monsanto owned company.

On 5th May, an international group of civil society organisations in Munich, Germany challenged a patent granted to Agracetus (now a Monsanto company). The patent is for a particle bombardment (biolistic) method of transforming soybeans and importantly it was granted to cover all soybean varieties by the European Patent Office. This is a very broad spectrum patent awarded on all existing GM soybean varieties (and all other plants using the same GM technology used by the soyabean work). Greenpeace-Germany is coordinating this challenge.

Dr. Suman Sahai, president of the Delhi based non-government organization Gene Campaign was invited to Munich to depose as an expert to challenge the soybean patent before the Opposition Bench. The bench is a group of experts from the European Patent Office who sit to hear oppositions to a patent and decide on it. Others in the opposition coalition were Greenpeace Germany and civil society organizations from Canada, Germany as well as a scientific community member from China.

Interestingly, joining cause in opposition to this patent were the corporations Syngenta and De Kalb in Munich. Syngenta and De Kalb are in opposition because such a broad patent prevents them from entering the market with soyabean varieties of their own. They are obviously reluctant to accept that Monsanto will hold a monopoly on all GM soy varieties. Not surprisingly, before acquiring Agracetus Monsanto had opposed this patent. What is surprising though is the soy patent has been upheld in the EU which has so far had more liberal patent laws and greater reservations about plant patents. The grant seems to indicate an apparent shift in official EU policy. Ironically, a similar broad spectrum patent held by Agracetus on all GM cotton varieties, was struck down in the US.

A public meeting was organized by Greenpeace-Germany on May 6, to explain the negative consequences of such sweeping patents on the researchers and farmers of developing countries. Dr. Sahai said it is important to bring the attention of the west to the grave implications of such patent mediated monopolies on the food and livelihood security of developing countries since access to new technologies will be denied. In her deposition before the European Patent Office in Munich, Germany, Dr. Sahai argued for the canceling of the patent granted to Agracetus for transforming soybeans, covering all soybean varieties.

The philosophy and rationale of the patent system, which was to balance public and private interest. Now, with broad patents, monopolies are sought to be established in a way that private interest outstrips the public interest.

While some of the reasons cited for opposing the patent were technical, there were several arguments submitted that generic and question the very premise of granting any broad spectrum patent, soyabean included. According to those opposing this patent, if upheld it would effectively restrict access to this technology for anyone with new or novel ideas to further improve soybean. Any further research on soybean by any person or agency, without royalty payments to Agracetus would not be possible. This would create a situation that establishes monopoly, is anti-competitive and will stifle innovation and development in the field of agricultural research and crop development. In the present day of functional genomics, with its potential to discover new and novel genes that can be used for crop improvement, this broad spectrum patent will deter research to improve soybeans and other plants.

The impact of such a broad patent extending to all plants will become a grave impediment to the ability of developing country researchers to access new crop improvement technologies to breed new crops for their regions. Patents per se and such broad patents particularly have grave implications for farmers in developing countries. Restricting access to seed can strike at food and livelihood security by limiting the ability to access new seeds that can help to cope with biotic and abiotic stress situations that occur from time to time in agriculture. Patents of the kind being claimed and granted on biological materials and seeds are in essence faulty and cannot be defended since variability is a central feature of biology and the innovation is not reproducible. Every plant in a field of any crop variety will be different to the others.

Any patent on crop varieties and certainly one with such a broad scope is in essence inequitable and unjust since it appropriates the several innovative contributions made by other parties, specially farmers, who have created the land races and farmer varieties on the basis of which further breeding takes place. If it took a hundred steps to create a new crop variety, it would be safe to assume that farming communities have contributed at least the first 80 to 90 steps and the scientists such as the ones claiming this patent have contributed the last few steps. They cannot be allowed to appropriate the innovations and contributions of farming communities and other scientists by claiming a patent and that too one with such broad application.

In acknowledgement of the deeply critical nature of vital sectors like food and medicine for the survival and well being of communities in today’s developing countries, patent laws have granted a special status to these sectors. IPR regimes have been soft and flexible so that monopolies in the form of strong and exclusive patents do not become serious barriers to communities who have vulnerabilities with respect to food and health security. Broad spectrum patents go directly against the philosophy and rationale of the patent system, which was to balance public and private interest. The innovator was rewarded with a temporary monopoly on the invented product so that he/ she continued to benefit society by inventing new and useful products. This was the reason for ‘utility’ being such an important feature of a patent claim. Now, with broad patents, monopolies are sought to be established in a way that private interest outstrips the public interest. This attitude cannot be in the larger interest of most people and this patent must be opposed on that ground alone.

Later this month, the Opposition Bench ruled to uphold Monsanto’s broad patent. While the official decision will come out later, the civil society coalition that opposed the patent will go into appeal.

This article appeared in India Together on 01 May 2003 - https://indiatogether.org/brodpatnt-agriculture/ 

📍GM, agriculture, and food security

India's position is opaque, based on incomplete research, and unresponsive to public health and food security issues. Dr. Suman Sahai lists recommendations from a national symposium.

A two day national symposium on “Relevance of GM Technology to Indian Agriculture and Food Security was organised by Gene Campaign on Nov. 26 and 27, in Delhi, to celebrate its 10th Anniversary. The Multistakeholder symposium brought together speakers and participants from across the entire range of views held on the subject of GM crops. Speakers ranged from strong supporters of GM technology to those equally strongly opposed to it and those with measured views. Participants included scientists, academics, social scientists, farmers, members of parliament, lawyers and judges, representatives of government, including the regulating agencies, various policy makers, the National Academy of Agricultural Sciences (NAAS), the seed industry, food processing and retailing industries, environmentalists, consumer organisations, organic farmers (IFOAM) and civil society organisations.

The two-day event witnessed a series of high quality presentations and strong, focussed discussions. One thing that all speakers pointed out was the appalling state of the Regulatory Framework in India and the urgent need to change it. Members of the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC), India’s apex regulatory body explained the process of regulation and in the face of vociferous demand, agreed to put more data on the GEAC website.

Members of the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee explained the process of regulation, and were met with vociferous demands for better information.

A series of recommendations emerged from the two-day consultations. These are being forwarded to the Government’s Task Force on Biotechnology, the GEAC, the Department of Biotechnology, the Minister of Science and Technology, the Indian Council of Agricultural Research and the Ministry of Agriculture, the Ministry of Environment as well as the Prime Minister’s Office.

Recommendations

1. A distinct law should be enacted to oversee Genetic Modification Technology and its implementation. This law must harmonise with other laws and national and international agreements.
2. A comprehensive biotechnology policy should be developed in consultation with all stakeholders.
3. A statutory National Bioethics Commission must be set up.
4. There should be a consultative and participatory process to prioritise crops and traits for genetic improvement through biotechnology with the goal of addressing the needs of small farmers and Indian agriculture.
5. Investment in public sector research should be increased and strengthened. Novel gene discovery in crops of relevance to India should get highest priority.
6. India must develop a policy for transgenic varieties of crops for which it is a Centre of Origin and Diversity. Commercial cultivation of GM rice should not be allowed until the nature of gene flow and its impact is understood.
7. The Herbicide Tolerance trait should be subject to rigorous cost and risk benefit analysis before being considered for adoption.
8. Alternatives to the GM approach must be carefully evaluated in each case before deciding on the GM route. A cost and risk benefit analysis must be conducted before deciding on a GM product.
9. Protocol for food safety tests must be vastly improved and mechanisms for long term monitoring of human health (post GM food release) be put in place.
10. Develop a stringent protocol to assess environmental and ecological impact.
11. There should be provisions for post-market surveillance and monitoring of GM products.
12. Have a policy to deal with bio terrorism urgently.
13. India must exercise caution in the IPR regime that it adopts. The current PPV-FR should be retained since it balances Breeders and Farmers? Rights.
14. A new statutory, independent National Biotechnology Regulatory Authority must be established.
15. Make GEAC more competent, transparent and accountable. Post data on research and development of GM crops and products on websites and local newspapers.
16. An annual review of all decisions on GM products must be presented to Parliament.
17. Conduct a scientifically sound study to assess attitudes and perceptions about GM technology among stakeholders in India.
18. Undertake a program of awareness about GM technology to educate the public.
19. Organize a series of public debates across the country to elicit the views of the people, to channel it into policy making. The government should fund this exercise.
20. There should be a moratorium on commercial cultivation of GM crops until the regulatory system is demonstrably improved. Research on GM crops, however, should continue.

This article appeared in India Together on 01 Dec 2003: https://indiatogether.org/gmconf-agriculture/

📍How India’s shrinking education, health budgets are betraying rural youth!

As thousands of government schools close and health funds stagnate, Centre prioritises building roads over uplifting people, crippling our demographic dividend

After the students’ protest against repeated leaks of exam papers, attention has now shifted to the abysmal state of education in India.

According to a recent report, some 94,000 government schools have been closed down over the past 10 years. This in a country where education, especially in rural areas, is pitifully inadequate, even non-existent in some places.

Not surprisingly, the inexplicable action of closing government schools has led to a substantial drop in overall school enrolment. A corresponding rise in private school numbers should not surprise anyone either.

Enrolment falls

Families in the lower income bracket, especially in villages, know education is their only chance to give their children a better future. The closure of government schools is a brutal setback. It places a heavier burden on low-income rural and marginalised communities who rely on affordable public schools in the neighbourhood.

The mid-day meal offered by government schools is a particularly crucial support for families by providing one hot, nutritious meal to children who really need it.

There is another factor in the case of primary schools. The longer walking distance to private schools, far from the neighbourhood, triggers higher school dropouts, especially for young children and girl students. This unfortunate development is accompanied by official statistics that should be alarming for a country that has such challenges in the education sector and where large numbers of children and young people are not able to access a decent education.

Budget priority

There is a reliable metric for assessing whether a sector has gained or lost importance in government policy. That metric is the budget allocated to it.

The share of education in the Union Budget has declined significantly over the past 12 years. This raises questions about the government’s priorities and the relative importance being given to education.

The Education Ministry’s share in the Union Budget fell from 4.6 per cent in 2013-14 to just 2.5 per cent in 2025-26. This means education gets approximately half the money today compared to what it got 12 years ago.

The budget cut indicates that despite education remaining a fundamental requirement for India’s social and economic development, its relative priority in government spending has declined.

Skill building

Linked to education is the government programme on skill building. Training to upgrade skills in different sectors was started in the form of the National Skill Development Corporation (NSDC) established around 2008. This was later given a higher focus in 2015 in the shape of the Skill India Mission and the National Skill Development Mission.

Despite the importance of skill building and the government’s emphasis on Skill India, the actual allocation to the Ministry of Skill Development and Entrepreneurship has remained bafflingly minuscule. It started in 2015 with an embarrassing 0.06 per cent of the annual budget and sank further to 0.05 per cent by the time we came to 2025-2026.

The much-touted Skill India Mission is languishing at a measly 0.05 per cent of the annual budget. How will our youth, especially rural youth, get any skills to get decent jobs, turn entrepreneurs, or become income generators?

Rural healthcare neglected

The healthcare situation is no beacon of hope either. Look at the teeming numbers of patients from rural India thronging the hospital corridors, standing in mile-long queues in cities like Delhi, Lucknow, Patna…any city really.

The reason: there is very poor healthcare available in villages. Primary Health Care Centres (PHCs) don’t have medicines and are severely under-staffed; district hospitals are better but seriously lacking in quality healthcare. The result is that everyone flocks to urban centres where medical care is available.

The fact is that access to healthcare in India is highly inequitable. Cities have all the benefits: world-class hospitals, medical specialists, and the latest medicines. Rural areas, on the other hand, have to deal with doctor shortages, inadequate facilities, and limited access to essential care.

Even in government hospitals, urban centres have more than twice the number of hospital beds compared to villages. Urban areas, in addition, have a massive density of private tertiary-care hospitals. Over 80 per cent of speciality-qualified doctors practice in major cities, leaving rural PHCs devoid of specialists like surgeons, cardiologists, orthopaedists or paediatricians. Medical services like advanced diagnostics, intensive care units (ICUs), and multi-speciality care remain predominantly urban too.

Burden of rural poor

Since quality medical care is almost exclusively urban-centric, rural people must travel long distances and incur high out-of-pocket expenses for major medical needs.

In this grossly unjust backdrop, let us examine the government’s budget allocation for healthcare. The health budget has remained largely stagnant over the years, fluctuating between 0.5 per cent and 1.9 per cent of the GDP. That’s a shame for a country with such large challenges in the health sector and such a large disease burden in rural areas.

The decline or stagnation in government spending on education and health is extremely worrying for the future of India’s youth. Our demographic dividend, which should have been the motor for the country’s growth, has been hamstrung in the absence of support and has become a demographic burden.

What comes next shows the almost dystopian nature of government spending.

Roads get priority

As education, skill training and health are treated as (very) poor cousins, the roads and highways sector gets substantial support. The share of the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways in the Union Budget has almost trebled over the past 12 years, rising to nearly 6 per cent of the total budget in 2021-22 and it hasn’t changed substantially after that.

Now, it can’t be anyone’s case that roads and highways must not be built. We all agree that better connectivity is a good thing. But not ahead of essential requirements like health and education.

Not supporting health and education is a gross injustice since it affects the poor disproportionately. It is also a clear violation of the rights of all citizens to get equal access to the state’s resources, which are the resources created by taxes paid by the public.

The article appeared in The Federal on 26 August 2026: https://thefederal.com/category/opinion/education-skills-healthcare-government-spending-india-budget-priorities-254686

📍El Nino is not the only threat, there’s AMOC too

Grappling with El Niño, Super El Nino this year, we are au courant with factors that affect our climate and what climate change is doing to our weather, our resources and our well-being. There is another rather huge factor affecting our climate that we know considerably less about. That factor is the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation. That is quite a mouthful isn’t it? Let’s just work with AMOC, it’s easier.

AMOC is a broad swath of ocean currents in the Atlantic which is crucial to keep the waters of the world’s oceans circulating. Many parts of the global climate depend on this circulation and the ocean currents doing their thing properly. The AMOC swath carries warm water, salt and nutrients from the tropics to Europe and the Arctic and brings back cold water from deeper ocean layers back to the tropical region. When the cold water from the north enters the Indian and Pacific oceans, it directly impacts weather patterns in the Asia–Pacific region. One weather pattern that is impacted significantly is the Indian monsoon. 

The bad news is that the AMOC has been slowing down in recent years. Scientists are warning that this slowdown is now such that it could ultimately lead to the collapse of the AMOC itself. Slowdown is bad enough, a collapse would have dire consequences for every region of the world. A slowing or collapse of the AMOC would disrupt the redistribution of heat across the globe, leading to widespread turbulence in the climate. 

If the warm waters of the south were not to reach the north, Europe would see considerable cooling and the east coast of America would witness a rise in sea levels. According to climate models, in the Asia- Pacific region there would a southward shift in the rainfall belts and changes in the timing of when that rain comes. The monsoon systems could see massive disruption, with the Indian SW monsoon system being particularly vulnerable. 

With the unchecked rise in global warming the AMOC is likely to be weakened more rapidly. If this happens , the southward shift of the current rainfall belts will intensify and take away the rain from current monsoon regions. What that means is that the Indian monsoon could slip off the subcontinent. One need not spell out how dire that scenario is and how severe its implications will be. Judging by the global lack of commitment to do anything about arresting global warming, the only choice that India and the countries of the Asia-Pacific have, is to prepare adaptation plans. Plan aggressively for water conservation on a massive scale.

📍Ken-Betwa Link: Development or more mindless discrimination?

Linking the Ken and Betwa rivers has become an issue once again. Members of the communities living along these rivers are protesting this in novel ways, lying on simulated funeral pyres in the river waters, starting hunger strikes in a submerged state, or standing in the river with nooses around their necks. “We’ll turn into Durga and Kali,” say the women protesting in chest-deep water. The images are powerful, disturbing, they tell you how much this move has upset those who live along the river and venerate it.

I have travelled through this landscape a few times over the years. In Panna the Ken river flows with a rare serenity, almost stillness. The forests are alive with biodiversity, the terrain rugged yet beautiful, and the river sustains not only wildlife but entire communities of farmers, fishers, forest dwellers and pastoral families. To stand on the banks of the Ken is to understand that rivers are not merely channels of water to be engineered on drawing boards. They are living ecological systems. Which is why the Ken-Betwa river-linking project is deeply troubling.

The project is being promoted as a solution to Bundelkhand’s water crisis, with promises of irrigation and drinking water for drought-prone districts. But beneath the language of development lies a familiar and disturbing reality: Forests will be destroyed, the ecology dented. Thousands of people will lose their homes and ancestral lands, and they will lose their livelihoods. India’s track record on rehabilitating persons displaced by dams and development projects is very poor, in fact rehabilitation in India has rarely been just or complete. Rather than equitable development, this project too, like earlier dam projects, will help some and discriminate against many others.

Independent estimates suggest that more than 22 villages would be displaced, affecting over 7,000 families in Panna and Chattarpur districts, and of these, 20 villages would be completely submerged by the Ken-Betwa project, many of them Adivasi communities dependent on forests and river ecosystems for survival. The Daudhan dam, the cornerstone of the ₹45,000 cr Ken-Betwa Link Project (KBLP), alone will submerge large areas, including parts of the Panna Tiger Reserve. The irony is painful: a project meant to solve distress in one region will create another geography of suffering elsewhere.

This is a familiar playbook and India has seen it before. When the Bhakra-Nangal dam was built after Independence, it was hailed as one of the “temples of modern India”. It is located on the Sutlej along Bilaspur in Himachal Pradesh and Rupnagar in Punjab. Yet behind that grand national narrative lay the 371 submerged villages which took away everything from some 36,000 families — their homes, assets and livelihoods.

Families were promised cultivable land, rehabilitation and a better future. Decades later, many oustees were still fighting legal battles for proper compensation and land rights. Reports have documented how displaced families were pushed onto barren or disputed lands, while many landless workers and labourers were excluded entirely from compensation because they did not possess formal land titles. This pattern repeated itself across India. 

The Hirakud dam in Odisha displaced more than one lakh people and submerged over 300 villages. Many never received proper rehabilitation.

The Pong dam displaced more than 30,000 families from Himachal Pradesh, many of whom were relocated to Rajasthan with promises of fertile agricultural land. Several families reportedly received arid land without irrigation or clear ownership rights. Some are still fighting for justice after half a century.

The Narmada Valley Development Project, which includes large structures like the Sardar Sarovar Dam and other dams on the Narmada river, led to massive displacement. Over two lakh rural and tribal people lost their homes and lands to reservoir submergence without fair compensation. The Narmada project also caused severe environmental damage, like submergence of dense forests, destruction of local wildlife habitats and obstructed the migration paths for fish. Official statements usually assert that rehabilitation has been completed, but independent investigations document missing land allotments, fake registries, uncultivable plots on a large scale and thousands of excluded families. Even today, many displaced families continue to seek their just dues and compensation. This is the history of “development” and discrimination in India.

Such discrimination results in livelihood collapse. The forest gatherer loses access to forest produce. The fisher loses the river. Tenant farmers, artisans, cattle grazers, boatmen and agricultural labourers disappear from official compensation records because they do not exist in government records. This is why people in the Ken-Betwa region are anxious. They know of the government’s track record on rehabilitation.

Equally worrying is the ecological blindness underlying the river-linking approach itself. Experts have warned repeatedly that the hydro-dynamics of Indian river systems are still inadequately understood. Climate change has already altered rainfall behaviour across India. Rivers that appear “surplus” today may not remain so tomorrow. Yet massive irreversible interventions are being pursued with astonishing confidence.

Bundelkhand’s water crisis is real. But it cannot be solved through ecologically disruptive mega-projects. Destroying the environment and upsetting the natural balance can never provide sustainable solutions, which is what we should be seeking, not shortcuts that have failed time and again. Rivers are not pipelines. Their flow patterns, seasonal rhythms, sediment loads, groundwater recharge functions and biodiversity relationships are deeply interconnected.

Dry regions in India built sustainable systems to ensure water access using decentralised water systems — tanks, ponds, watershed structures, forest protection and groundwater recharge practices adapted to local ecology. Instead of strengthening such systems and improving them, we choose to chase gigantic engineering solutions because they appear politically dramatic. The tragedy is that in such projects, the benefits and burdens are rarely borne by the same people. Water and electricity flow somewhere else, to urban centres and commercial agriculture. But the people who surrender their forests, villages and ancestral lands are often left with nothing more than broken promises.

This appeared in The Asian Age: https://www.asianage.com/opinion/columnists/suman-sahai-ken-betwa-link-development-or-more-mindless-discrimination-1981618

📍Destroying Uttarakhand

Many years ago when I went to school in Nainital, it was a place of thrilling natural beauty. Uttarakhand then a part of Uttar Pradesh, (UP) was lush and green wherever you looked. Every place seemed like a picnic spot.

In 2000, the new state of Uttarakhand was created, hiving off the hilly areas of UP and some parts of the terai. Then “development” began in right ernest , turning this haven into a concrete jungle. A study conducted by the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) using satellite imagery, climate data, and GIS analysis shows that snow cover decreased by over 1640 sq km from 1992 to 2022. In the same period concrete construction increased 13 times from 40.66 sq km in 1992 to 526.35 sq km in 2022.

Uttarakhand is being slowly buried under concrete. Gone is the haven with lush green forests full of wonderful plants, birds and animals. In its place is emerging an ugly built up blot on the Himalayas. Not only is the state turning ugly, it is also turning dangerous. Roads are being cut into hillsides without any planning, opening them up to landslides which have increased several fold. Forests are being slaughtered, driving wild life away and altering the ecosystem for the worse. Forests regulated water flow, when they are cut flooding increases. 

The perverse tragedy is that the development that is needed, is not reaching the villages where good schools, health care, basic services and livelihood opportunities are desperately required. All the development is devoted to urban areas converting them into monstrous concrete jungles. You just have to visit the famed hill stations of yesterday - Nainital, Dehradun and Mussoorie to see what hideous urban sprawls they have become. 

This kind of “development” that our so called ‘vikas’ oriented government boasts about, is actually raising vulnerability, for people in the mountains, as well as for people living downstream. The Himalayas are a living, fragile ecosystem with tenuous limits. It is extremely foolish and highly dangerous to think you can continue treating mountains like construction sites. Nature will have the final say and the consequences will be extremely unpleasant, as we have already begun to see with increasing incidences of manmade calamities.